Social Justice: The Presumption of Guilt

     One of the core tenets of the Social Justice faith is a manichean worldview of demonic perpetual oppressors and saintly perpetually oppressed; this requires a presumption of guilt based on race (or some other kyrirarchical aspect) which can not be disproven, for the accusation will always be there and if one isn’t guilty of one thing, then one is necessarily guilty of another. A recent thread by a John Hayward (@Doc_0) is worth reading in it’s entirety, but a few highlights are worth mentioning especially.

     This is the irony of the obsession over “systems of oppression” and “institutional privilege and power”: When one gains power over the oppressor, the oppressor stays the oppressor and must be presumed to still have “institutional” designation in order to justify their punishment, with the corollary that those who now have actual power must still be the downtrodden oppressed even if they not only have real power, but engage in “justice” that is as bad as, or as worse, than what the perpetually designated oppressor did, or is accused of being.

     The result of this is to push more people into this manichean “us vs. them” paradigm since if you are going to be called a “racist” anyway and punished for it, then you have a better chance if you ally yourself with others called “racist”, even if those others are racist. But then, perhaps that’s the point.

     This is the irony of “social justice”: It replaces a society that, while imperfect, still has at its core the limitation of power and thus its abuse that ultimately is anathema to evil, with a society evil may thrive and true oppression is empowered.

     That too, is perhaps the point after all.

This entry was posted in Progressives and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to Social Justice: The Presumption of Guilt

  1. Pingback: In The Mailbox: 07.21.20 : The Other McCain